“For all of his hopes about bipartisanship, Barack Obama has the most polarized early job approval ratings of any president in the past four decades.”
I view the United States as close to being a one party state, and that Party is the DC Power Party. They seek to centralize more power, not just in Washington DC but in the hands of a Credentialed Aristocracy. This Aristocracy is not yet hereditary, but it is headed that way. You notice the groups that are the biggest boosters of “Affirmative Action” don’t mind nepotism (think Hollywood and Politics). Those who rant the most about “conflicts of interest” don’t think the concept applies to them and their close family members. Andrea Mitchel married to the Fed Chairman? What could be wrong with that? And what is wrong with a Senator bequeathing his seat to his daughter or his son? Even affirmative action, in practice, favored the daughters of this emerging order over the sons of sharecroppers.
When President Obama speaks of bipartisanship, he speaks of uniting this Aristocratic group into a permanent governing class. Of course Republicans cannot totally go along because they represent the “pockets of resistance.” These are folks who see themselves firmly on the other side of the divide and whose children will be out of favor in the credential hunt. They would not object to an aristocracy of merit and accomplishment — which is attacked as greed and selfishness by the Credentialed, since this would give upper middle class kids a leg up (especially if the parents instill drive and ambition in their kids). Interestingly, they would have a leg up on the poor and working class kids but be a threat to the Patrician class, who would like to flow into power the way the river flows to the sea.
As long as this Aristocracy could acquire more power it could grow and welcome new members (in fact, offering membership was a tool for acquiring power). But now they are reaching their “limits to growth” and they will need to cement their leadership in place and pull up the bridge behind them. A situation of low growth and controlled growth will help them — so society itself much reach its “limits to growth.”
In the latest economic crisis we find the relationships among the various actors obscured and the causes portrayed as beyond our understanding. More and more we will find that the actors in the various dramas are in some sense related. And being a part of the same Aristocratic Class will not be a reason for recusal. Why be a member of a select class and give up the advantages?
In this Credentialed State, a lot of power accrues to the gate keepers of entry into the Aristocratic class — those who will grant “The Patents of Nobility.” Demanding that the novice display Fidelity to the emerging order by signing on to some rather bizarre ideas makes a lot of sense: it shows they are willing to suppress their individuality in the service of the new class (early in the process this looks like a “counter culture” of free thinkers and then emerges as the autocratic PC of the narrow minded). Of course, you are expected to do more than mouth these ideas, you are expected to believe them.
What infuriates liberals (read progressives) are arguments that make these ideas look as nonsensical as they are. Hence the new cliche, “Shut up, they explained.”
